CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. ADJ7673518, ADJ7647749
Regular
Jan 23, 2015

ANA DE AYALA vs. AO-THE UNIVERSITY CORPORATION / CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY NORTHRIDGE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and reversed a prior ruling, finding the applicant sustained industrial injury to her neck. While the applicant testified to injuring her neck in a workplace incident and this was partially corroborated, the Board found insufficient evidence for other claimed injuries. The Board specifically disagreed with the administrative law judge's credibility assessment concerning the neck injury itself, relying on medical reports and testimony supporting the neck injury claim. The Board affirmed the denial of claims for all other alleged injuries, finding insufficient medical evidence to link them to the incident.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and OrderIndustrial InjuryNeck InjuryBack InjurySpine InjuryUpper ExtremitiesPsycheGastroesophageal SystemInternal System
References
Case No. ADJ3133261 (VNO 0400017)
Regular
Aug 17, 2010

FELIPE TOLENTINO vs. CONCO CEMENT, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, XCHANGING INC., FREMONT COMPENSATION

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the lien claimant's petition for reconsideration as premature. The WCAB granted the defendant's petition for reconsideration regarding the temporary disability overpayment issue, deferring it for further proceedings. The Board affirmed the WCJ's findings on injury causation and permanent disability but amended the decision to clarify the overpayment issue. Finally, the WCAB issued a notice of intention to sanction defendant's counsel for attaching and citing unadmitted evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardFELIPE TOLENTINOCONCO CEMENTCALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATIONXCHANGING INC.FREMONT COMPENSATIONliquidationADJ3133261VNO 0400017OPINION AND ORDERS DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND GRANTING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION
References
Case No. ADJ6950787
Regular
Jun 22, 2012

JOSE BARRIENTOS vs. MARK GREENBERG, ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration. The defendant argued the administrative law judge (WCJ) abused discretion by finding the applicant credible, specifically regarding the duration of employment to exclude him from employee status under Labor Code §3352(h). The WCJ adopted the report recommending denial, emphasizing applicant's credible testimony regarding hours worked and pay, and finding the defendant's testimony less reliable due to a lack of direct knowledge. The Board extended great weight to the WCJ's credibility findings, affirming the denial of reconsideration.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJcredibility findingLabor Code §3352(h)employee definitionconflicting testimonyobservational demeanorunreliable testimonyunrebutted testimony
References
Case No. ADJ10443669
Regular
Oct 04, 2017

Donna Carter vs. Rose International Group, OneBeacon Insurance Group

The Appeals Board affirmed the Workers' Compensation Judge's finding that Donna Carter sustained an industrial injury to her right knee and left wrist on May 18, 2016. Despite inconsistencies in the applicant's testimony regarding a slip and fall incident, her account was corroborated by a witness who found her on the floor. Medical records from the day of the incident also supported the applicant's claim, establishing a clear mechanism of injury. The Board found that the common sense nature of a slip and fall does not require expert medical opinion to establish industrial causation for the incident itself.

ADJ10443669Rose International GroupOneBeacon Insurance GroupDonna CarterWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardOpinion and Decision After Reconsiderationslip and fallindustrial injuryright kneeleft wrist
References
Case No. ADJ9120742
Regular
May 11, 2016

CHRIS KING vs. SAN JOSE JOB CORPS, INSURANCE COMPANY STATE OF PA, BROADSPIRE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration of an award to the applicant, Chris King. The defendant argued the applicant's testimony was not credible due to discrepancies in medical records and reporting delays. However, the Board gave great weight to the Administrative Law Judge's credibility determination, which was supported by independent witness testimony corroborating the claimed injury during an MMA class. The Board found no substantial evidence to reject the judge's findings, affirming the original award.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJcredibility determinationTrainee Employee Assistance Program SpecialistMixed Martial ArtsMMAneck injuryright shoulder injurydysphagia
References
Case No. ADJ8186548
Regular
Jan 10, 2014

JOSE GONZALEZ TORRES vs. GREAT WALL SEAFOOD CORPORATION, TRANSPORTATION INSURANCE COMPANY, CNA CLAIMS PLUS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the findings of the Workers' Compensation Judge. The applicant's claim was denied based on inconsistent testimony and a lack of credible evidence establishing an employment relationship. Defense witnesses, including the company's general manager and secretary, credibly testified that the applicant was not an employee on the date of the alleged injury. The Board gave great weight to the judge's credibility findings, which were supported by substantial evidence.

Petition for ReconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ reportcredibility findingGarza v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.employee statusloader/unloaderinconsistent testimonydeposition testimonywitness testimony
References
Case No. ADJ7039301
Regular
Mar 16, 2011

ROBLY HART vs. LA JOLLA PACIFIC/DRR NEFF & ASSOCIATES, OAKS RIVER INSURANCE/BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIES

This case concerns Robly Hart's workers' compensation claim for an injury sustained in a motorcycle accident. The applicant was a construction consultant who used his motorcycle for work, traveling between home, job sites, and interviews. The primary dispute centers on whether the accident occurred during the course and scope of his employment, with conflicting evidence regarding his activities and timeline leading up to the incident. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied reconsideration, adopting the judge's report that found the applicant's testimony lacked credibility due to inconsistent statements and timeline discrepancies.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for ReconsiderationWCJGarza v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Findings and OrderCourse of EmploymentConstruction ConsultantBuilding InspectorMotorcycle TravelJob Sites
References
Case No. ADJ9976213, ADJ9977047
Regular
Feb 22, 2017

MATTHEW SMITH vs. ACTION ROOFING, SUSSEX INSURANCE COMPANY, INTERCARE HOLDINGS INSURANCE SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) granted removal but dismissed the defendant's petition for reconsideration, finding the WCJ's prior findings were not a final order. The defendant sought to compel the applicant's deposition testimony and suspend benefits due to alleged fraud (playing softball while claiming disability), but had not proven a conviction for workers' compensation fraud. The WCAB affirmed the WCJ's refusal to compel testimony based on the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. However, the issue of the applicant's assertion of a right to privacy at deposition was deferred and returned to the trial level for further proceedings.

WCABPetition for ReconsiderationPetition for RemovalJoint Findings of FactWorkers' Compensation FraudFifth AmendmentSelf-IncriminationRight to PrivacyDepositionCompel Testimony
References
Case No. ADJ8009793
Regular
Nov 07, 2013

FELICIANO BARRANDA, FAUSTINO BASABES vs. MIKE ETCHANDY FARIAS, INC.; STAR INSURANCE COMPANY, Administered by MEADOWBROOK INSURANCE GROUP

In this workers' compensation case, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the defendants' petition for reconsideration of a prior decision. The WCAB affirmed the finding that the applicants sustained injuries arising out of and in the course of employment, specifically applying the "required vehicle" exception to the going and coming rule. This exception was found applicable because the employer benefited incidentally from the use of applicant's private vehicle for transporting workers and tools between fields on the same day. The WCAB gave great weight to the Administrative Law Judge's credibility findings, particularly the testimony of applicant Feliciano Barranda.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAOE-COEGoing and Coming RuleRequired Vehicle ExceptionJoint Petition for ReconsiderationCredibility FindingSubstantial EvidenceSole Witness TestimonyEmployer Witness TestimonyApplicant Testimony
References
Case No. ADJ2211265 (AHM 0083473) ADJ4072860 (AHM 0083472)
Regular
May 06, 2011

Darlyn Piper vs. DANKA OFFICE IMAGING, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE CO.

This case concerns applicant Darlyn Piper's appeal of a permanent disability award for injuries sustained while employed by Danka Office Imaging. Applicant argues for total permanent disability, challenging the WCJ's reliance on Dr. Marinow's apportionment and deposition testimony. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration because the WCJ failed to address the admissibility of Dr. Marinow's deposition testimony. The case is therefore remanded for the WCJ to determine the deposition's admissibility and weight before issuing a new decision.

Darlyn PiperDanka Office ImagingZurich North AmericaLiberty Mutual Insurance Co.permanent disabilitytotal permanent disabilityvocational rehabilitationDr. Marinowapportionmentnon-industrial factors
References
Showing 1-10 of 1,546 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational